Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sudheesh vs State Of Kerala on 18 November, 2016

Author: P.Ubaid

Bench: P.Ubaid

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

      FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/27TH KARTHIKA, 1938

                    Bail Appl..No. 8163 of 2016
                     ---------------------------

  CRIME NO. 1282/2016 OF THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA
                           --------------



PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
----------------------

            SUDHEESH,
            AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.SUDHAKARAN,
            SUDHILAYAM VEETIL, ADINADU NORTH MURI,
            KULASEKHARAPURAM VILLAGE.


            BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU
                    SMT.S.SEETHA

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
-------------------

            STATE OF KERALA,
            THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            THRIKKUNNAPUZHA POLICE STATION,
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031.


            BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI


       THIS BAIL APPLICATION  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION  ON
       18-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:


PJ



                             P.UBAID, J.
              ---------------------------------------
                       B.A.No.8163 of 2016
               ---------------------------------------
           Dated this the 18th day of November, 2016

                             O R D E R

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.1282/2016 of the Thrikkunnapuzha Police Station, registered under Sections 511 of 376(2)(a)(i) and 452 IPC. He seeks regular bail from this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C., on dismissal of his application by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Haripad, on 08.11.2016.

2. The prosecution case is that at about 3 pm on 04.11.2016, the petitioner, under some pretext, came at the house of the complainant and made an attempt to her. She is aged only 20 years. On a perusal of the complaint, I find that it is a matter for probe during trial whether the allegations will constitute attempted rape or only outrage of modesty. To cross the stage of preparation and to make an attempt, something more is required. Anyway, in view of this doubt as to whether the allegation will exactly constitute attempted rape, I feel it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. What is B.A.No.8163 of 2016 2 revealed prima facie is an instance of molestation or outrage of modesty. Whether this is actually a case of attempted rape, is a matter for decision on trial.

3. This application for regular bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, they will definitely obstruct the investigation.

4. On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials including the case diary and the report of the investigating officer, I find that investigation in this case is practically over, and that the petitioner can be now released on appropriate conditions. I find that the Investigating Officer has already questioned the material witnesses, and has collected the necessary materials for a prosecution. I do not find the necessity of continued detention of the petitioner in custody. However, some reasonable conditions for bail are felt necessary in the particular facts and circumstances.

In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The petitioner will be released on bail on their executing a bond B.A.No.8163 of 2016 3 with two solvent sureties for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate or the learned Special Judge having jurisdiction. Bail is granted on condition that;

a. The petitioner shall report before the Circle Inspector of Police, Haripad, between 10 am and 11 am on all Thursdays for a period of two months.

b. The petitioner shall not enter the revenue village where the house of the victim is situated, till trial of the case is over, unless otherwise permitted by the trial court for sufficient reasons.

c. The petitioner shall not in any manner influence or intimidate the witnesses, and he shall not have any contact with the material witnesses directly or over telephone or otherwise.

d. The petitioner shall not involve in any sexual offence, till trial of the case is over.

e. The petitioner shall not enter the limits of Thrikkunnapuzha Police Station, for a period of two months. B.A.No.8163 of 2016 4

Forward a copy of this order to the Circle Inspector of Police, Haripad, who will report compliance of conditions directly to the learned Magistrate.

Sd/-

P. UBAID, JUDGE sd // True Copy // P.A. to Judge